Charles Rangel urges reprimand, not censure

Rep. Charles Rangel (D-N.Y.) wants the House to issue a formal reprimand — rather than the more serious censure — as his punishment for violating ethics rules.

Sources with knowledge of Rangel’s plans also said the 80-year-old New York Democrat will ask the House ethics committee, which found him guilty of 11 ethics violations Nov. 16, for permission to speak to the full House before any sanction is carried out.

Text Size

-

+

reset

POLITICO 44

These sources also noted that Rangel had signed an agreement in late July — which Republicans on the committee ultimately rejected — admitting to several ethics violations with reprimand as the punishment. That agreement was negotiated by Blake Chisam, chief counsel and staff director for the ethics committee, the sources said.

And Rep. Gene Green (D-Texas), who chaired the special subcommittee that conducted the Rangel probe, told reporters July 30 that the panel had recommended a reprimand for Rangel. Green later retracted those comments under pressure from Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-Calif.), chairwoman of the full ethics committee.

Rangel was found guilty by the ethics panel of 11 counts of violating ethics rules, including charges that he improperly solicited millions of dollars from corporate officials and lobbyists for the Charles B. Rangel Center for Public Service at City College of New York, failed to disclose hundreds of thousands of dollars of income and assets on financial disclosure forms, maintained a rent-stabilized apartment as a campaign office in a Harlem apartment building and failed to pay income taxes on a villa in the Dominican Republic.

The Associated Press reported Sunday that Rangel had recently sent $15,000 to the U.S. Treasury and New York state treasury, money that was supposed to make up for taxes he had not paid. This was per order of the ethics panel.

The ethics committee approved censuring Rangel as punishment for those violations. Chisam, who acted as lead prosecutor in the case, told the panel that Rangel’s conduct warranted a sanction “between reprimand and censure,” but he ultimately came down in support of censure. The ethics committee voted 9-1 on Nov. 18 to censure Rangel.

Members of Rangel’s camp now argue, however, that censure — in which a member stands in the well of the House to receive a verbal rebuke from the speaker — is too heavy a punishment for the New York Democrat. They point out that the ethics committee admitted that Rangel was not personally corrupt, a common element of cases in which censure is used against lawmakers.

I have brought you lessons on how to successfully cheat the system I have showed you how to sell legislation I have showed you how to provide PORK for votes I have showed you how to flim flam a Functionally Illiterate constituency I have showed you how collect money in envelopes I have showed you how to convert campaign money into vacation homes TAX FREE

Look what I have brought you my fellow democrats I have brought you lessons on how to successfully cheat the system I have showed you how to sell legislation I have showed you how to provide PORK for votes I have showed you how to flim flam a Functionally Illiterate constituency I have showed you how collect money in envelopes I have showed you how to convert campaign money into vacation homes TAX FREE

Yes, for that I should get a REPRIMAND

But if you were a Republican I would want your sorry keester in PRISON

Why should he be censured ? After all being a thief, lying and not paying taxes seems to be a norm with our elected congressional elites. They can make laws for the american people but like all the trash serving at United Nations and in Washington they feel they are above all american laws.

Charlie Rangel, Maxine Waters and our Kenya born president belong in jail and only the cowards in Washington (Dems and Repubs) are keeping them out.

The names 'skunk, rat and weasel' come to mind but I just can't bring myself to debase, demean and insult the 'skunk's, rat's and weasel's' good names. Rangel should resign from office after apologizing to the nation. He has disgraced his office, defiled his constituants and defrauded the American people. How is that less serious than a groping, which the government now sanctions?